Search is Media - a Hot New Trend?

Garrett · #1 (**permalink**) 12-12-2003, 02:58 PM

Well, I just got back from the conference in Chicago, but I still have so much I want to tell you about that I didn't have time to mention yesterday!

A Hot New Trend? It appears that a new trend may be developing in the search engine world. In his Keynote speech, Jim Canzone of AskJeeves said, "Search is everything." Jim said he's been noticing that search is taking users away from other informational mediums, such as newspapers, radio, and television, because it provides information so quickly and efficiently. It's not surprising that search is the number one web activity.

Google's Not the Only Engine. According to Jim, search query volumes grow at an average of 30% each year while search engine users only grow approximately 8% each year. This means that people are searching more and the uses of search are expanding. People use approximately 2.8 search engines per month, he says, trying to emphasize that Google isn't the only search engine out there.

Does Paid Inclusion Hurt Relevancy? Greg Jarboe, president and co-founder of SEO-PR, asked how paid inclusion effects result relevancy.

Poor Jim began to squirm. It was painful to watch him backtrack and shuffle around, trying and failing to provide a solid answer.

Relevancy is important but profits are, too. Should all search engines move in the same direction as Google in order to provide more relevant results? Obviously, all search engines will say, "Yes, we can provide relevancy AND paid inclusion!" However, I think that over time users will determine what happens. If searchers begin to see too many ads showing up in search results, they'll starting searching elsewhere. If a search engine loses its searchers it loses its business.

Search is Media. What's interesting is that Greg backs up what Jim said with one of the most interesting views on search engines I've ever heard. He sees them not just as search tools, but as a media outlet. Every medium has its own audience profile. As Greg said, "The quality of the information determines the quality of the audience."

Lowest on the Food Chain. "MSN is the lowest on the food chain," Greg says. "Lots of people have Internet Explorer browsers with MSN as their search default. These are newbies who haven't figured out that they have options yet. For some marketers, this is a good audience."

The Many Eras of Yahoo! Greg went on to explain the nature of MSN's competitor, Yahoo. According to Greg, the Yahoo audience is more complex than that of MSN. First of all, Yahoo was one of the earliest and best ways to find information and content on the web. Greg even went as far as to break Yahoo's history down into different eras:

Era One - Human editors provide Yahoo with a real personality. Eventually this becomes too expensive.
Era Two - Enter: Inktomi, Stage Left
Era Three - Hello, Google!
Era Four - Inktomi again.

Greg's point is that the relevance and power of the Yahoo search has changed throughout the different eras, but the Yahoo audience is loyal due to familiarity; they know how to find what they want, and the fact that Yahoo offers free email as well doesn't hurt ;)

Big, Bad Google. Google, however, is for hard-core searchers. It's very utilitarian, Greg says. It's very "just the facts, ma'am!" The Google persona can be compared to that of an engineer in that it's objective and unbiased.

Greg's take on AskJeeves was very interesting. He said, "AskJeeves reminds me of the Canadians. Canadians are very aware that they're not Americans while Americans aren't aware at all of the Canadians."

Now, before anyone gets offended by this statement, I think what he means is AskJeeves is aware that it's not Google or other top search engines, but many other search engines see it as a minor player.

What do you think he meant by this?

maniactive · #2 (**permalink**) 12-12-2003, 04:16 PM

Wow Garrett, you're right: the Canadian/American analogy is pretty insensitive. But it's also a woefully inaccurate analogy, and it doesn't make a lot of sense if people really do use an average of 2.8 search engines per month.

Firstly, Canadians ARE Americans: North Americans. And Canadians ARE well aware of this fact.

To follow the analogy, non-Google search engines ARE search engines, and they're aware of this, too.

And even the people who use Google ARE aware of other search engines! As you stated, people use 2.8 non-Google engines per month for their searching needs.

However, I'm kinda doubting this stat: and here's why --

I manage sites that have relevant keyword phrases in the top ten for a bunch of engines...Google, MSN, altavista, alltheweb, hotbot, yada, yada...and yet the traffic from Google delivers way over 7x the traffic of all the other search engines [b]combined[/b]!

If everybody who searched used at least 1 other engine to search for the same phrase, I'm thinking that I'd see the same amount of traffic from all the other sites...mathematically, that'd make sense, right? (Please let me know if anyone thinks my math is off...or if they can corroborate with their own stats.)

Folks use Google because it works for them. If it doesn't deliver results, people will go elsewhere.

Thus far, they have not...in my experience, as I review my stats.

Anyone else have a different story to tell? I'm all ears...

apisdesign · #3 (**permalink**) 12-12-2003, 05:57 PM

According to Word Tracker, Google receives over 35% of all Internet search traffic. The next largets player is something like 19%. What this tells us is that Google gets less than twice as much traffic as the next closest competitor, and only slightly more than 1/3 of all search traffic.

So why do we see disproportionately more traffic coming from Google searches than all other searches combined (i.e. 7 times more)?

My theory is the type of products and services people on this forum tend to offer is directly related to our target audience. Our offerings are primarily IT-service based, and those of us with product-sale sites may have a common thread as well (what it is, however, I have no idea. Perhaps IT-related products?).

I believe that like-minded individuals use similar search engines. As was mentioned earlier, Google is for power users; nerds, if you will. Namely you and I here on webproworld. As a group we tend to use Google and as a group our customer base is probably more tech-savvy and therefore uses Google more than average. This would suggest that we are a bit of a niche market that leans toward Google.

Did everyone follow that? It's Friday, and I'm having great difficulty with communicating today...

Anyway, that's my theory. Like minds thinking alike and all that.

That's my $0.02.

Regards,

P.S.

Quote:

Firstly, Canadians ARE Americans: North Americans. And Canadians ARE well aware of this fact.

As a Canadian, I can in fact confirm that we, as a people, are indeed aware of our status as 'North Americans'. But please don't call us American or else we'll have to invade your country, steal all your watered down beer, take it home to our igloos, and play lots of drunk ice hockey in the snow.

:-)

maniactive · #4 (**permalink**) 12-12-2003, 06:24 PM

Hey, man, I hear you. I'm a dual-ie, myself.

(Dual citizen; does that make me a Canadian-American, or a US Canadian? Or...oh, never mind. I live stateside, and people here think I have a "Canadian" accent, and Canadians tease me because I "talk like a yank and don't pronounce my vowels right". But, I cross the border frequently, and if I say I'm an "American", I get a lecture from the border guards, who claim that Canadians are Americans, and that I'd better be more specific. I swear, I'm should become a citizen of the universe and renounce all earthly ties! :) But I digress...)

Actually, my sites aren't particularly IT related: everything from honda parts to realtors to swimming with dolphins to elementary teaching materials and beyond! And if I expand my original definition, should I count in AOL/Yahoo along with Google? That would up the 7x figure significantly.

Seriously. For one site, I get more AOL traffic than Google traffic, but it's all the same thing. Just more "newby or family types" that come from AOL...

What do you think?

spiderbait · #5 (**permalink**) 12-12-2003, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maniactive

(Dual citizen; does that make me a Canadian-American, or a US Canadian?

Actually, as a fellow dualist, I think it makes you a "true North (strong and free)" American :-)

*that's from the Canadian National anthem in case anyone didn't recognize it, but as good hockey followers, I'm sure most did.

radu · #6 (**permalink**) 12-15-2003, 05:36 AM

hi there,
I noticed 80 % of my visitors (this month)come from Google, then Yahoo, 11 %, MSN, 6.4 %.
I have to mention I talk about a site dealing with travelling (hiking) in Romania, so there is no "IT People" influence.
(on the other side, it's true I work in IT and use google for 95 % of my searches :)) )

I ask myself (and you) if there is a geographical orientation / difference in using the search engines, rather than a type of service one.
Majority of my visitors come from USA, Canada and West Europe.
For example, is Google still restricted in China ??

radu

dmilford · #7 (**permalink**) 12-15-2003, 09:55 AM

Hello,

Users using on average 2.8 search engines per month is interesting but I wonder which they use first?

Personally I use Google and only if I don't find what I'm looking for do I try another SE, so I might exceed the 2.8 figure but in terms of the % of searches I perform with the vast bulk are with Google. Likewise because I've used Google first when I do a search in my 'second choice' engines I've already looked at many of the results in Google so will look at fewer of the results in the other engines.

schmeetz · #8 (**permalink**) 12-15-2003, 10:55 AM

I think it’s because the first page on other search engines have ppc adver. Majority of searchers click on the first ones they see and have no clue what ppc is. As result we are excluded.

minstrel · #9 (**permalink**) 12-15-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrett

The Many Eras of Yahoo! First of all, Yahoo was one of the earliest and best ways to find information and content on the web. Greg even went as far as to break Yahoo's history down into different eras:

Era One - Human editors provide Yahoo with a real personality. Eventually this becomes too expensive.
Era Two - Enter: Inktomi, Stage Left
Era Three - Hello, Google!
Era Four - Inktomi again.

Greg's point is that the relevance and power of the Yahoo search has changed throughout the different eras, but the Yahoo audience is loyal due to familiarity

Loyal but not expanding? I also think the note in "Era One" is important for anyone looking for ways to improve cataloguing the web.

Quote:

Greg's take on AskJeeves was very interesting. He said, "AskJeeves reminds me of the Canadians. Canadians are very aware that they're not Americans while Americans aren't aware at all of the Canadians." ... What do you think he meant by this?

LOL... I think he must have visited Canada at some point!

More seriously, I think he's correct but I'd make two obervations:

1. Who was aware of Google just before they burst on the scene? If you are developing a new product or service, or trying to remarket an old one, current awareness isn't necessarily an impediment as long as you can offer something unique - and the propogation of new ideas on the internet can occur very rapidly.
2. I agree with the characterization of Google as utilitarioan - it's like no-frills grocery shopping with quality. One of the problems with Ask Jeeves and Mamma.com is they have these cutesy logos that make it hard to take them seriously. You don't have to be staid and stodgy but you do have to look proefessional and cute cartoons aren't the branding I'd want if I owned either of those companies.